Coptic reader 29th of Coptic month

I'm curious what people think about the way Coptic Reader deals with the 29th of the Coptic month:1) they shorten the commemoration of saints in the tasbeha, even though it is not a major or minor feast but a 'commemoration' of a major feast2) the rites are changed even when the 29th is not on a Sunday, though I was always taught that the 29th is only celebrated on a Sunday.3) I'm almost certain this is a glitch, but maybe someone can confirm: Coptic reader only includes the responses for the annunciation but not the nativity or resurrection (I'm looking at the liturgy next Sunday on it).

Also, another random question, is neknai o panoti always said after the morning doxology, even though it's just been said at the end of the midnight psalmody (on Adam days).

If ontos can't be said, does that mean that none of the hymns of the apostles fast can be said either? Because Coptic reader includes ontos, asomen, doxology of the apostles (although to be fair, you need to click on this to view it, so it is optional), and even the Psali Adam for the Apostles Fast in the tasbeha.

Also, I would appreciate it if anyone could shed more light on why SUS diocese is only using the responses for the annunciation. Is this a local practice, or has it been mandated by the Holy Synod?

@ophadece does anyone know the whether the Holy Synod has an official position on this matter, as I have heard both rules from reputable sources (eg I have second hand info from Fr Athanasius Iskander saying that it should only be on a Sunday). Although I must admit, celebrating the 29th as farayhee regardless of the day of the week seems to make more sense.

Yes @ophadece is correct as always. The 29th of the month is celebrated no matter which day of the week it is (except a couple months are not celebrated) and it is always farayhee. I think the way SUS made their program was that the readings correlate with the responses...so the readings are from the Annunciation, so only the Annunciation responses are shown. However, it should be the responses for all 3 feasts (Annunciation, Nativity and Easter).

@p your hypothesis makes sense, but it does not explain why SUS would post this on their website. They would not announce that the rite had changed just because the current setup of the program does not allow for the correct rite to be displayed.

1. The psalmody states that the shortened commemoration of the saints is for the joyous ritual which the 29th is so that is not wrong. Some take the view that as it is a commemoration of the feasts and not tge actual feasts then it is permitted to say it all.

2. The 29th of the coptic month when celebrated is always the joyous rite. I say when celebrated to refer to the fact that it is not celebrated from the 1st Kiahk until after the feast of Pentecost. I think what you are referring to is the argument over readings. General practice is that the readings are always the Annunciation I.e. 29th Paremhat however there is another school of thought which states that if the feast falls Mon-Sat then you read the 29th of the month from the daily katameros and if only if it comes on Sunday (which would always be a 5th Sunday) you read 29th Paremhat. Archdeacom Roushdy Wasef admin of the clerical college has always said that the old Katameros had the same readings each month for the regular feasts being 12th, 21st and 29th and that the modern day katameros was updated to include unique readings for these days.

3. The feast is 100% a commemoration of the Annunciation, Nativity and Resurrection. In arabic it also has the title which translates to "The three feasts of Salvation". There are those who incorrectly refer to it as the commemoration of the Annunciation but there is no evidence for this at all especially when all the hymns end in 'aktonk' and not 'aki'

Neknai oPanouti is an adam praise although chanted daily after the morning doxology.

1) my psalmody says that shortening the magma3 is only on major and minor lordly feasts, which makes sense since we're supposed to focus on Christ not his saints. If it's for the joyous tune at any time, then wouldn't that also include el Nairouz, which has nothing to do with a lordly feast, and in fact is a commemoration of martyrs - when we should actually be reciting all the names of the martyrs and thus definitely not shortening the magma3! What do you think? Always shortening it for joyful tune does not make sense!

2) makes sense! However I am sure I was told that the feast is totally ignored, both in respect to tunes and readings, if it does not fall on a Sunday.

3) I'm guessing it's ak tonk since Resurrection is the most important feast of the 3?

Also for 3) the Feast of the Cross is not joyous (although I guess it's close) and it's not a lordly feast, but coptic reader still shortens the magma3. What is your opinion?

Also if the feast of the Cross falls on a Sunday should it be ak tonk or avashk? Coptic reader says avashk which makes sense because the feast of the cross only happens twice a year, while the resurrection is commemorated every Sunday. However, logically, shouldn't the resurrection trump the crucifixion, in the same way as it trumps the Annunciation and Nativity above??

Btw the magma3 for el Nairouz, although it is festive, is actually not shortened by Coptic reader.

You are right. Tasbeha commemoration should be shortened, as this is a reliving of Lordly feasts. Nayrouz shouldn't follow that rule as you also rightly pointed out. Even if the feast of the Cross falls on a Sunday you'd say awashk as this is related mostly to the readings rather than the day of the week itself. Yes in other cases akdonk is the order of the day but that's an if not the exception. Lastly the feast shouldn't be ignored if it falls on any other day.

In my response to point one I stated "joyous ritual" not Lordly feasts. The feast of the Cross and Nayrouz are examples of non-Lordly feasts but they do follow the joyous rituals. I understand that the focus of Lordly feasts is on Christ himself but I personally do not see how this is achieved by shortening the commemoration of the saints. Either you remember them or you don't. For example on the feast of the cross we used to follow the rule but prior to concluding add the verse for Sts Constantine and Helen as they are clearly associated with the feast.

The 29th of the Coptic month if celebrated is always 'aktonk' without exception. As for the feasts of the cross the general teaching is Tishori and 'avask' regardless of what day of the week. However there exists a teaching of 'Tai shori' and 'aktonk' on Sundays but this is very uncommon and not adhered to. Your argument that the Resurrection should trump the crucifixion if applied to ritual would mean that we say 'aktonk' all year round and not stop from the 1st Kiahk until the Resurrection feast as we do.

Just to add to the conversation, Coptic Reader posted on facebook about having only the Annunciation responses as opposed to all three. "...in keeping with the original church rite of the 29th of the Coptic month, the service should be conducted as outlined in Coptic Reader, where the service follows the rite of the Annunciation feast."

There is no reference for that whatsoever. As I said previously in Arabic they call it "The three feasts of Salvation" and while extremely important salvation did not come through the Annunciation alone. In fact it would make more sense to just celebrate the Resurrection! However I am aware that there is some dispute over what is actually commemorated. A number of years ago we had Metropolitan Pachomious praying with us on one occasion and he insisted that all the responses were Annunciation and Nativity only and refused to allow anything for the Resurrection which I found a bit odd and he could not give any reason. If anything the Coptic church commemorates the Annunciation and the original Resurrection on the 29th Paremhat so the link there is easily identifiable.

One thing I will say about Coptic Reader is that I have on many occasions written to them about certain comments or rituals and a huge majority of the responses I get is "H.G. Bishop Yousef said so". Now I have full admiration for Bishop Yousef and also think the app is amazing but there has been occasions where his teaching via Coptic Reader has clearly clashed with standard practice and sometimes even Synod decisions. However this is not an attack on either His Grace or the app.

I don't think they are mistakes as much as they are decisions made by HGBY. For example my cousin who serves in the SUS has said that although the synod has decided that the entire creed should be said all of Holy Week and bright Saturday, HGBY has all the churches say the shortened versions until Easter Liturgy

There are no shortened versions of the Creed. I guess you mean skipping some sentences until the Ascension feast. In this very example it's not his opinion, it's what we've been taught in the church since we were young. The question is why that needed to change at all!